Putting all ethical concerns aside (as if I were a Democrat), I disagree. Tactically this is a sound move. The New York Democrats must now choose whether to defend Spitzer, or follow the moral lead of the Republicans. Either way, they are worse off politically than if they had made the call.
I will grant it gives Spitzer a chance to stay in office, but so what? He is politically wounded, and his replacement would have been another liberal.
However, ethically, it probably would have been more appropriate to wait a little longer to call for his resignation. They should only have butt in if both Spitzer and the Democrats were dragging their feet. But this is hardly a major ethical lapse.
Spot on. Heck the NY Press would cart out the rationale that since the Republicans did not demand for his resignation (or else impeachment) they would say, "See, even the Republicans don't believe this rises to an impeachable offense." This is similar to the US House or Senate Republicans putting forth a vote on whether to remove the troops or not from Iraq. It puts the ball in their court. And I'm sure after 24 hours of this being discussed the NY Pubbies came to the same conclusion that you noted.